Kerala HC: Applications under the Muslim Women’s Divorce Act Have a 3-Year Limitation Period  ||  Supreme Court: Property Transferred Before Filing a Suit Cannot be Attached under Order 38 Rule 5  ||  Supreme Court: No Review or Appeal is Maintainable Against an Order Appointing an Arbitrator  ||  SC: Terminated Contract is Not a Corporate Debtor’s Asset and a Moratorium Cannot Revive it  ||  SC: Cheque Dishonour Complaints Must be Filed at the Payee’s Home Branch under S.142(2)(A)  ||  Supreme Court: Bail Cannot be Granted Solely on Parity; Accused’s Specific Role Must be Assessed  ||  Kerala HC Upholds Life Terms For Five, Acquits Two in Renjith Johnson Murder, Says TIP Not Needed  ||  Kerala HC Orders Emergency Electric Fencing at Tribal School to Address Rising Wildlife Conflict  ||  Madras HC: Arbitrator Can’t Pierce Corporate Veil to Bind Non-Signatory and Partly Sets Aside Award  ||  Calcutta HC: Post-Award Claim For Municipal Tax Reimbursement is Not Maintainable under Section 9    

Delhi State Consumer Commission Orders Unitech to Pay Rs 33 Lakhs - (20 Aug 2019)

CONSUMER

Delhi State Consumer Commission has noted that homebuyers cannot be expected to wait indefinitely for the possession of flats and directed real estate firm Unitech to refund over Rs. 33 lakh to a resident. It directed Unitech to refund Rs. 33.59 lakh paid by Delhi resident Surhid Bhandari within 45 days along with simple interest at 10 per cent per annum for the seven-year delay in handing over the possession of the apartment.

Tags : DELHI STATE CONSUMER COMMISSION   UNITECH  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved